There is likely to be a lot of backslapping among Democrats who think that allowing the occupation of Iraq to continue without any conditions or accountability is smart politics, even though it is disastrously bad policy: at least Bush owns the policy, not us, is the thinking. It is true that now that the Democratic Congress has finally given in to the inevitable (I say inevitable because after all, so many of our paladins clearly signaled their willingness to give up the fight before it was ever joined, including Obama and Clinton who both stated their intent to deliver everything the President wanted, even as they voted for bills they knew would be vetoed. It was like walking on to a car lot with a cashier’s check for the sticker price and then trying to haggle…) and now there is surely little chance that the GOP can try to pin the Iraq debacle on us.
We are practically assured of retaining Congress and probably picking up the Presidency in 2008, no matter who the nominees may be. The play-it-safe Democratic strategists are breaking out the cigars and brandy. But they aren’t advertising the cost of their great ‘victory’…
Consider that the authorization funds the war through September. Over the last 5 months almost 400 American troops have been killed. There is little chance that the death rate will abate, and with Bush sneaking as many as an additional 50K combat troops into Iraq in a second, unauthorized surge, one can safely assume that this retreat will cost another 400 soldiers the ultimate price over the next 5 months we just funded.
That’s a heck of a butchers’ bill for one vote in favor of continuing a failed policy just because we don’t want to take any responsibility. Now consider that this strategy of washing our hands of the matter will likely persist until the Presidential election; that’s about 18 months away. At a very conservative average rate of 90 fatalities a month, over 1,600 soldiers may pay for Democrats’ ‘safe’ political choice with their lives.
Looked at this way (which is the only sane and ethical way to look at it) our Democratic representatives just chose to trade at least 1,600 American lives for a safe ride in the 2008 election. Rather than defend their choice to end the war to the American people (who support ending the war overwhelmingly, BTW) and risk their ‘political capital’ by bringing the war to a close prior to the election, they would rather let all those men and women die in the sands of Iraq for a cause that none of them really believe in.
Realist? Yeah, I concede that. It is undoubtedly better for the country that we maintain control of Congress and take the Presidency, and this retreat will probably help the Democratic party do that. Ethical? Condemning 1,600 Americans to die to make an election easier is not ethical. It is not defensible. It is not smart. The Democratic party just took the test by which future generations will measure our humanity, and we failed it.
Fuck us.
ARIZONA HUMANE SOCIETY ARE SELLING ANIMALS
THIS IS MY STORY ABOUT WHAT I FOUND OUT ABOUT THE REAL WAY THE ARIZONA HUMANE SOCIETY GETS AND ADOPTS ITS ANIMALS .
HORROR STORY FROM AZ HUMANE SOCIETY
THIS IS MY STORY THAT IS HAPPENING NOW
On June 8,2007 a 4 month old Papillion puppy was found by my daughter wondering the streets of phoenix Arizona on over 100 degrees temperature extremely hot his fur was fried dry he was thirsty tired but was very loving my daughter took him to the Arizona humane society to find out the AGE AND BREED OF THE puppy we saw that he was very young we named butterball. my daughter and i where told by the intake representative to fill out a form which was given to me this intake representative says that the form was to give information of the owner where the puppy was found that it was no problem to find out the age and the breed of butterball and that a representative would be calling Monday to give butterballs information to us I called Saturday to confirm that there was NO misunderstanding she was told that they would call Monday with his information fully assured that butterball was going to be returned by the intake representative with no worries waited until Monday getting ready for butterball home coming and at 3:54pm Monday a heartbreaking messages was left by don who said you dog is ready and will be sent off for surgery Tuesday I saying WHAT ! and his adoption free is $250.00 for napoleon or butterball what ever his name is and if you want him back he will be ready Wednesday I called Mr. don at the Arizona humane society and was asked if I had received a receipt for butterball and I did not !! MY FAMILY FEEL’S THAT THE ARIZONA HUMANE SOCIETY WAS HOLDING BUTTERBALL FOR RANSOM ! we where never told of a price nor that the puppy was never going to be given back to us WE FEEL THAT BUTTERBALL AND OTHER puppies are being taken in the same matter to be sold on the tv show pets on parade THE ARIZONA HUMANE SOCIETY HAS SENT BUTTERBALL TO PETS MART THEY ARE TRYING TO GET OUT OF WHAT HAS HAPPEN AND SOLD BUTTERBALL WITHOUT S KNOWING ANYTHING WHEN I CALLED THE ARIZONA HUMANE SOCIETY VICE PRESIDENT JILL WHO SAID YOU WILL NEVER GET HIM BACK HE IS OUR PROPERTY NOW ! after I informed them that I was taking them to court she says HAVE FUN ! I called Mrs. Cheryl Nuamnn C.E.O of the Arizona humane society left messages everyday asking for a return call about this NOTHING I STILL HAVE NOT RECEIVED A CALL so I called her assistant Tina she started to yell at me I ASKED HER WHY WHY ARE YOU YELLING AT ME and then asked me WHY DO YOU WANT HIM ? IT’S BEST IF YOU TAKE THIS TO COURT ! FEEL THAT THIS WAS TRICKERY AT ITS BEST TO IN SLAVE A INNOCENT PUPPY FOR THE PURPOSE OF A TV SHOW AND PROFIT OF THE ARIZONA HUMANE SOCIETY .how many family pets have they done this to ? how many people have they did this to ? DO NOT BE FOOLED BY THE WE CARE ABOUT ANIMALS ACT THEY ANY CARE ABOUT THE MONEY AND NOTHING ELSE NOT THE CARE AND BEST INTEREST OF ANIMALS
Dwight, I’m surprised. I thought I had already, long ago, heard you say the stupid thing possible. You continue to surprise me. “This War can be Won in One Day if The President give the order” What the…? That’s absurd, unless you mean to nuke Iraq out of existence. Oh, and this isn’t a war, it is a occupation, which is why the attrit rate is predictable, unlike a war in which large numbers die in set battles.
As for the rest of the rational people that have posted here, I don’t give a crap for all the apologias on behalf of Dems who turfed their responsibility to end this war. Political realism and expediency and strategy are all just different ways of saying political cowardice.
Correction;
We lost more troops in Iwo Jima in one minute than we will loose in the total War in Iraq.
Point is The War in Iraq is like the South Tucson Police handing out Tickets to Mexican Drug Gangs!
This War can be Won in One Day if The President gives the order,either this President or The Next!
I do not mean by running for the Kuwait Border either!
Sadr kills our Troops and is seen in a mile long carivan of cars and are Generals say this is” Freedom Of Speech!”
Isn’t odd that we are able to calculate the daily,monthly and yearly troop losses in the War in Iraq.
During World War I and World War II did we do the ame with such accurrancy? And Why or Why Not?
MSNBC reports that 70% of the Troops were killed by Road Side Bombs, with no enemy combat troops in sight?
We lost more troops in one hour in the Invasion of Normandy than we will ever loose in Irag.
We lost more troops in one minute than we will ever loose in the War in Iraq.
The United States is at War with Radical Islam which has cells in The United States and in every other country in the World. With this fact in mind how would a pullout in Iraq mean anything to Radical Islam but to have a home operating base with which to conduct attacks on Israel,Turkey, Germany, England, Africa, South America, Mexico,Canada and the United States?
There home bases are in Pakistan,Afghanistan, Iraq,Iran,the Southern Russian Territories and Kosovo where Clinton and General Clark defeated the Christian Serbs so that Radical Islam now rules Kosovo and has burned over 100 Christian Churches and replaced them with 1,000 Mosks!
Is this what we are fighting for?; the building of Mosks and the burning of Christian Churches?
Atticus, did you bother to read the comments on that Slaughter post at Daily Kos? She was ripped to shreds for her bull. Over 1000 comments 95+% ripping her apart for it.
Then, there was this response picking her post apart for what it really was:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/5/24/155026/455
Be sure to check out the graphic.
You know who I am most angry at? People without a brain in their heads who believe this bull. People like you, Atticus, who are too busy defending your worthless Congressman/women that you are sentencing servicemen like my cousin to death. He is doing his second tour, and is barely surviving psychologically if he manages to physically.
Stop making excuses and start working to end this war. The blood is on your hands too when you side with Bush.
If you think this is winnable, then pack your bags and get over to Iraq yourself. You can take my cousin’s place.
As explained in full by Rep. Louise Slaughter; a true progressive:
“First, the rule guarantees that a modified version of the McGovern redeployment bill that received 171 votes recently will be considered during the upcoming debate on the 2008 supplemental defense spending. In other words, we are guaranteed to have another chance to vote for rapid redeployment, no matter what happens.
This rule also contains two amendments from Rep. David Obey, the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. The first amendment contains all of the critical domestic spending that the Republicans and the President had derided as pork when it was brought up the first time. What we are talking about is an increase in the minimum wage, an increase in funding for military health care and veterans’ health care, and critically needed funding for agricultural disaster aid, children’s health care, and recovery from Hurricane Katrina, among other things. We are going to have a chance to pass all of it today.
The second amendment provides funding for the war as requested by the President, along with 18 voluntary benchmarks put in place by Senator Warner.
Both of the amendments discussed above will receive public debate and consideration on the House floor, and both will be voted on independently. All of those votes, obviously, will be public as well.
Now, the point of contention as I see it, and why Democrats are being accused of dishonesty here, is that by approving the rule, we allowed the funding bill to be debated – and because virtually all Republicans will vote for it (along with some Democrats), it will pass. People are therefore saying that it doesn’t matter if we vote against the supplemental spending amendment (which many of us will). All that matters is that we allowed it to be considered to begin with.”
READ THE FULL STORY HERE AT:
http://mydd.com/story/2007/5/24/161137/276#commenttop
What amendments are you referring to?
But at what cost? The risk it poses to our soldiers is far too great when one considers this president has never caved to any one else’s wishes, EVER. Breaking the will of congressional Republicans is a far safer option with a much greater likelihood of success. Not to mention the amendments proposed by Obey and others make this bill stronger than certain people would like to admit.
Atticus, that’s just asinine. If he were to wait and wait and wait as you say, and the Dems didn’t budge an inch and didn’t pass anything, Bush would be forced to end the occupation due to lack of funds. Yeah, he’d sure as shit try to blame the Dems for risking the lives/well being of the troops; saying that the troops are being put in harms way by the Dems. So what? Who even listens to that guy anymore? Everyone knows he’s a liar (well at least 60% of us anyhow) and the Dems could just say “Harm’s way? We just brought them home…how is that putting them in harm’s way?” That’s called spine. Something Gabrielle Giffords, Harry Mitchell and the rest of the yellow bellies in the Democratic party know nothing about.
How many more would die without these funds? You think the President cares? No. He does not. He would wait, and wait, and wait, accusing us of playing politics with their lives while he refused to yield an inch in the name of their safety all for his “legacy”. Our best chance is to break the will of Republican congressmen and senators, which can be done by making them vote again and again for an unpopular war and by patience. But this process takes time, and our troops need funding to even have a shot at survival. It is an unfortunate price we must pay, but it is either this or we let more people die because of the machiavellian tactics of this president.
Iam not talking about the mission ; Iam talking about the families and support groups that help the troops everyday!
The mission needs to be changed to a win not a loss!
We need to make radical Islam fear us not think they can play snatch and kill the troops as some kind of game to win over support for pulling out of Iraq, so they can have a State full of oil, to train for there next act!
An eloquent description of our situation to which I’d add:
Giffords voted yes on the sell out supplemental.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll425.xml
Supporting the continued occupation of Iraq is NOT supporting the troops. In fact, it is the exact opposite.
I think people generally mean “support the troops’ mission”, not “support the well-being of the troops” when they mouth this mealy slogan. I think the latter sense is fine and entails getting the hell out of Iraq. I think the former usage by jingos is not only contemptible use of the soldiers to support a narrow political agenda that is otherwise quite impossible to defend, but also ontologically impossible. One cannot support the troops’ mission if the mission is impossible.
This comment will self-destruct in 5 seconds… 4… 3… 2… 1…
Support The troops this Memorial Day; Don’t make them Political pawns.